BY SUMMER CRANDALL

One of the most disturbing consequences of recent ICE actions is the case of Renee Good, an American citizen whose death exposes how dangerously blurred the limits of federal power have become. An agency tasked with enforcing civil immigration law should never be in a position where it can plausibly kill a U.S. citizen without clear jurisdiction, judicial oversight, or accountability. If ICE agents were involved in Good’s death outside the scope of lawful authority, then this is not a tragic mistake, it is a constitutional failure. 

This should alarm every American. If immigration enforcement agencies can exceed their jurisdiction with fatal consequences and face limited scrutiny, constitutional rights become conditional rather than guaranteed. Accountability in cases like Good’s is not optional, and it is not radical; it is the bare minimum required to preserve the rule of law. A government that cannot respect its own limits cannot be trusted to protect its people. 

A clear path forward exists, but only if constitutional limits are enforced rather than ignored. Multiple federal courts have already shown that accountability works: in Chicago, a federal judge ruled that ICE violated a consent decree by conducting warrantless arrests without probable cause and ordered mandatory retraining and oversight, demonstrating that judicial enforcement can curb unconstitutional behavior (U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois). 

Reports from the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General have repeatedly found that ICE lacks consistent oversight and fails to properly document use-of-force incidents, increasing the risk of rights violations. Congress should respond by strengthening oversight requirements, mandating judicial warrants for arrests involving citizens, and expanding independent investigations when lethal force is used. Supreme Court precedent, including Tennessee v. Garner makes clear that deadly force by law enforcement is only justified when there is an immediate threat, a standard that must apply to federal immigration agencies as well. Upholding these safeguards does not weaken enforcement; it restores public trust and ensures that no agency operates beyond the Constitution.

The question raised by recent ICE actions is simple but unsettling: if constitutional limits can be ignored in immigration enforcement, when do they stop applying at all? The Fourth and Tenth Amendments exist to protect the public from exactly this kind of unchecked authority. Allowing federal agencies to operate beyond their jurisdiction  especially when lives are at stake  sets a precedent that weakens the rule of law for everyone. Protecting constitutional rights is not a political stance; it is a civic obligation. If Americans fail to demand accountability now, they may find those protections far easier to lose than to recover.